From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F19C48BE5 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 11:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B77F46128E for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 11:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233815AbhFSLec (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jun 2021 07:34:32 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42332 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233146AbhFSLeb (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jun 2021 07:34:31 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com (mail-qk1-x72b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69842C061574; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 04:32:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id c138so17794661qkg.5; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 04:32:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wzF+HDIW4RpiFDwS3pehtK/Z2s3VtrcKXebmPCvAZ0Q=; b=X+Qf5RWTBKQu6s7dtYculR2/zvfqf8gdMKqjVYzEv3qNetrKxMPAZvzz1cv4lqJJCZ BrrhDIMj1wZnX/GbuH72DXqZH4gxo2hEmwxP9FXWh3fWaUR2BOkRNxB0vpdLjw/HVo95 dJPnzLlar08ywytPHAaNIBGbK56LyRTP1xkBdF3gdbQ0V/1IojPRvl6Rm80Ee4IEqPJV l0Ldrs566oPH7TDjkfqgZ7pzyBXDroT3o5goUsH1lgBiK/2WWPFpdeOzG+YmgDi4HRov ufMvi8cIShMHu3HgzKIU9+Vdu0Rd1+Zsv+fBgfiZ/XPBdcI+QUtLuzws+6HLXwOpEN33 WJ0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wzF+HDIW4RpiFDwS3pehtK/Z2s3VtrcKXebmPCvAZ0Q=; b=jDuDNqsTt12tdy873VUmv8k8LBO7zNtHau86E2qkbO/8Cuo83kQpFvc6wSpSdbnTgh SM4KBogxIbCgFULJ/Y3CJS4wyw5J01btkg6acesDY+yfI673ZtokYSYGGEgmgbsZZUcD IH0M882gwDJNJ+eygpLUfAL6RHtFrVmH8Up5a0Gte26PkPkq1hf15G0MHuA2pQE76kTY 1MSyCk/5y5CbxHKRAroADIjN5LqTsYmin1uM+8JRGDCBoh2mwrgIGcXGXqGM/ZlV0g5e 0tU/k/Xx91zeS+nbUwr7ya0hY4hcAh50sDW68HgN8086oNiUPvE+9363roz3X1n/W+8r Z90A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RIEq3oR9SdwXA3anNPu0oOpckOpSBqyxcUYuwV47Hp1UVj7ha b5PPmU+HKrfCDVJqtJatUDZxAcluG3jIoJTFMWA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx92e5rLjLDFjNc+QgHX4Z6IHN/Br95iCNXiblcUb6SA9kzIrWK8a3IFw+BgDRLkdt6KKpgOVMgSlR04EbJ/MA= X-Received: by 2002:a25:880f:: with SMTP id c15mr18259680ybl.247.1624102339591; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 04:32:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210618233023.1360185-1-ndesaulniers@google.com> <20210618233023.1360185-2-ndesaulniers@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:32:08 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] compiler_attributes.h: define __no_profile, add to noinstr To: Nick Desaulniers Cc: Kees Cook , Peter Zijlstra , Bill Wendling , Sami Tolvanen , Peter Oberparleiter , Masahiro Yamada , Nathan Chancellor , Luc Van Oostenryck , Ard Biesheuvel , Will Deacon , Arnd Bergmann , Andrew Morton , Rasmus Villemoes , linux-kernel , clang-built-linux , "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" , Borislav Petkov , Martin Liska , Marco Elver , Jonathan Corbet , Fangrui Song , Linux Doc Mailing List , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Dmitry Vyukov , johannes.berg@intel.com, linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 19, 2021 at 1:26 PM Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > I am not sure if it is best or not to have the GCC link in order to be > consistent with the rest of the links (they are for the docs only). Do > we know if GCC going to implement it soon? i.e. if GCC does not implement it yet we use elsewhere this kind of marker instead: * Optional: not supported by gcc The first of its kind, normally it is clang/icc there ;-) We could nevertheless have the link there, something like: * Optional: not supported by GCC https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80223 Cheers, Miguel